Op-Ed Reveals Just How Little Most Gun Control Advocates Understand Guns

The murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson rattled more than a few cages. There are reports of CEOs traveling with armed security, though I haven’t seen corroboration of those, and we’ve seen just how many people are OK with murdering someone simply because they don’t like them.

And in the media, it’s been a great time to push all the evils of so-called “ghost guns” since it turns out the alleged killer had one in his possession.

The problem is that a great many of those in the media who are beating the drum really don’t know what they’re talking about.

Just in time for Christmas and Hanukkah and Kwanzaa and the winter solstice and New Year’s, Republicans and Democrats find themselves face-to-face with a problem they can actually solve together.

They can outlaw so-called “ghost guns” like the one used to kill a health care executive recently in New York City.

Imagine that. A genuine end-of-the-year opportunity to do something for the common good — something that transcends cultures and religions and politics.

Yes, dear reader, I know what you are thinking: Our nation’s political system is so broken that Republicans and Democrats barely speak to each other. So actually solving a problem — well, that may take a miracle.

But this is a season of hope, right?

Ghost guns are virtually untraceable. They can be made at home, from plastic-like materials on a 3D printer. They look like toys. And prospective shooters can even pick a favorite color, with choices ranging from tennis ball green to Barbie pink.

But these guns are definitely not toys. And we all know what ghost guns can do. We saw one in action on the morning of Dec. 4, when a hooded, masked man stepped from the predawn shadows on a sidewalk in midtown Manhattan and killed a health care executive with a shot in the back.

First, let’s talk about gun tracing, since that seems to be the main condemnation of these homemade firearms.

There’s no evidence that gun tracing has ever been used to solve a crime. People have specifically looked, and while there might be an exception they missed, it’s clearly not an essential tool for law enforcement, especially since there’s no way it would be enough to secure a conviction in and of itself.

Second, let’s get into the “they look like toys” argument, which is a new one for me. I guess I should be thankful for that because a new argument means that I get to take a different, novel approach in response. I generally like that.

However, this one is too idiotic to actually enjoy rebutting.

They look like toys? Where the hell is he looking at homemade guns? Yeah, they’re plastic–polymer, actually, but who am I to quibble?–but the gun that the alleged killer had on hand was one that basically looked like a Glock, the most popular handgun model in the country. Toys generally are made to look like real guns anyway, so that’s a nonsense argument even if it were true.

The reason there’s no outrage over “ghost guns” is that the people who are outraged over the murder are the people who support gun rights, as a general thing. That’s it. That’s why there’s “no outrage” over Thompson’s murder. The people who want to be outraged over guns are too busy celebrating a murder, which just goes to show it’s not about the guns, it’s about people like you and me having them.

Saudi Suspect Plows Car Into German Christmas Market; U.S. Media Blames [Checks Notes] the Car

An attack on a Christmas market in Magdeburg, Germany, has left at least two people dead and 60-80 injured. According to Die Welt:

A driver drove into a group of people at the Christmas market in Magdeburg. Government spokesman Matthias Schuppe confirmed to WELT that it was an attack. City spokesman Michael Reif also said that the initial report was an “attack on the Christmas market”. The suspected perpetrator is in police custody. WELT learned from security sources that he is a man from Saudi Arabia who was born in 1974.

The Saudi national, who had reportedly been in Germany illegally since 2006, allegedly rented a car and headed to the market two hours west of Berlin, which was teeming with visitors enjoying the Christmas festivities. A suitcase was found on the passenger seat of the vehicle, according to Die Welt, and authorities are currently trying to ascertain whether it contains an explosive device. The terrorist was taken into custody, and it’s not known whether he acted alone.

A police spokesman said the suspect drove “at least 400 meters across the Christmas market.” A witness said the attack occurred in the market’s fairy tale section.

Police have secured the area and are asking people to avoid the city center.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz wrote on X, “My thoughts are with the victims and their families. We stand by their side and by the side of the people of Magdeburg. My thanks go to the dedicated rescue workers in these anxious hours.”

Federal Interior Minister Nancy Faeser recently called for vigilance at Christmas markets. “Federal security authorities do not currently have any concrete indications of danger,” she told reporters. “But in view of the high threat situation at an abstract level we still have reason to be very vigilant and to take effective action for our security.”

Deutsche Welle reported in November on Germany’s new knife ban:

the German government passed new security legislation in October in response to a deadly knife attack in the western city of Solingen in August. The suspected Islamist attacker killed three people and injured eight more.

The new security package tightened rules on the carrying of weapons in public spaces in Germany and explicitly banned the carrying of knives at festivals, sporting events, markets, fairs and other large events.

“The police will be present in many locations to ensure security,” said Faeser.

The attack in Magdeburg comes eight years, almost to the day after Muslim extremist Anis Amri hijacked a truck and plowed into a Christmas market in Berlin, killing 12 and wounding 56 others. According to the Combatting Terrorism Center at West Point, Amri was in Germany illegally and was well known to authorities both for his radicalism and his crime sprees:

When Amri entered the European Union on April 4, 2011, via the Italian island of Lampedusa, he claimed to be 16 years old. After his arrival, he was placed in a refugee shelter for minors in Belpasso, Sicily. The Italian authorities asked Tunisia for travel documents in order to return Amri to his home country, but the request went unanswered. In October 2011, Amri and four other Tunisian refugees attacked a staff member at the shelter and started a fire. Amri was arrested and sentenced to four years in prison. It was during his incarceration in different Italian jails that Amri became radicalized. A report for the Italian Committee for Strategic Anti-Terrorism Analysis (CASA) stated that Amri was considered a “dangerous person” and a “leader of the Islamists in prison” and that he was “transferred due to severe security concerns.” Amri had threatened and attacked staff and reportedly threatened to decapitate a Christian inmate.

On June 17, 2015, Italy was legally required to release Amri from a deportation facility because Tunisian authorities had not responded to its request to send travel documents for him.  After his release, Amri traveled to Switzerland, where he stayed for around two weeks before traveling to Germany. In early July 2015, German police in the city of Freiburg, near the Swiss border, registered Amri for “unlawful entry” under the name Anis Amir and took his fingerprints and photo. [Emphasis added]

U.S. media outlets were quick to blame the car for today’s attack:

The Clock Strikes Thirteen
And the Establishment gets washed away by a preference cascade. But it was a damn close-run thing.

What happened? It’s like a spell broke. Since November’s election (re-election?) of President Donald Trump, the woke is going away, and all sorts of problems are resolving themselves. But why?

There are several reasons, but basically, it’s a preference cascade.

In law we talk about the proverbial thirteenth chime of the clock, which is not only wrong in itself, but which calls into question everything that has come before. Most of our institutions have been chiming thirteen for quite a while, and people have noticed.

But it’s not enough to notice. Soviet citizens knew their system was founded on lies, too, but the system kept them isolated, unaware that so many of their fellow citizens felt the same way, and unable to come together to act.

This technique, used by totalitarians of all sorts, is called “preference falsification,” in which people are forced to profess belief in things that they know not to be true. If the powers that be are good at it, virtually every citizen can hate them and want them out, but no one will do anything because every citizen who feels that way thinks they’re the only one, or one of a tiny number.

In his classic book, Private Truths, Public Lies: The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification, economist Timur Kuran notes how governments, and social movements, do their best to enforce this sort of ideological uniformity. People tend to hide unpopular views to avoid ostracism or punishment; they stop hiding them when they feel safe.

This can produce rapid change: In totalitarian societies like the old Soviet Union, the police and propaganda organizations do their best to enforce preference falsification. Such regimes have little legitimacy, but they spend a lot of effort making sure that citizens don’t realize the extent to which their fellow-citizens dislike the regime. This works until something breaks the spell and the discontented realize that their feelings are widely shared, at which point the collapse of the regime may seem very sudden to outside observers — or even to the citizens themselves. Kuran calls this sudden change a “preference cascade,” and I believe that’s what’s happening here.

In America, the left spent years bullying people into accepting “woke” ideas on race, gender, and politics. There’s considerable reason to believe that a majority of Americans never accepted these ideas, but between constant media repetition, and the risk of being mobbed and canceled if you disagreed with them, most people for years were afraid to stand up.

But two things put a stop to that. One was Donald Trump’s election. The other – and the two are related – was Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter, now X, which is now a free-speech platform with roughly equal representation of Democrats and Republicans. Both had the effect of blowing up the lefty bubble and letting people realize that they, not the woke, were the actual majority.

Continue reading “”

Smith & Wesson Gets Booted Off Facebook

One of the oldest firearms manufacturers in the United States, with generations of history supplying legal firearms worldwide to law enforcement, police and other government organizations, not to mention millions of civilian customers, has had their Facebook account shut down.

Getting the boot

According to a post that Smith & Wesson made on The Social Media Platform Formerly Known As Twitter (“X,” as Elon Musk wants us to call it now), the historic manufacturer saw their Facebook account canceled in late November, 2024. Here’s their announcement, verbatim:

Despite our extensive efforts and resources spent on trying to adhere to Facebook’s ever-changing community guidelines on firearms, our account was suspended indefinitely on Friday, November 22nd, 15 years after its original creation.

In an era where free speech and the right to bear arms are under constant attack, we want to thank @elonmusk and @X for supporting free speech and our constitutional rights guaranteed by the 1st and 2nd Amendments.

While we work to reinstate our account, we encourage our 1.6 million Facebook followers and fans to seek out platforms that represent these shared values.

https://twitter.com/Smith_WessonInc/status/1861856272657822178

 

They posted the following image of their ban announcement as well:

And for his part, Twitter/X owner Elon Musk replied to Smith & Wesson’s post by saying “We restored the gun emoji and believe in the Constitution 🔫🔫.”

An ongoing trend

While some readers might be surprised by this news, they shouldn’t be. Meta-owned Facebook is just one of many online platforms that continue to enact restrictions on legal firearm owners—I myself have received warnings for posting photos from a hunting stand. YouTube creators have seen their channels targeted by anti-firearm restrictions in recent months. In an era of political and social instability, Big Tech appears to be doubling down on its slow march to ban public displays of firearms, instead of walking back policies that discriminate against gun owners.

Why There Can’t Be Two Sets of Rules on Guns

Even in some of the most anti-gun states, there are groups that get exceptions to many restrictions. Police officers are often exempt from many gun control laws. They can buy stuff that you and I might not be able to, simply because of their status as law enforcement officers. They also get to keep those guns after they leave the profession in most cases.

And while police officers do an important job and many are outstanding in what they do, there shouldn’t be a different set of rules for them.

Understand that I’m not anti-cop. My father retired as a local police officer, then went back into uniform to serve as the chief of police in a small town nearby. I grew up around law enforcement and so I know something that a lot of people on both sides might not want to hear. Cops are people.

Because they’re people, there are good and bad individuals who wear a badge.
This comes up because of this case out of Connecticut.

NEW LONDON, CT — A judge has ordered a police officer accused of assaulting his girlfriend to stay away from the woman and surrender any weapons he has, according to The Day of New London.

Julio Gil-Martinez, 29, of New London, was arrested Saturday on a warrant and charged with first-degree unlawful restraint, second-degree strangulation, second-degree threatening, third-degree assault, and interfering with an emergency call, New London police said in a news release.

The arrest came after a victim went to the Waterford Police Department to report the incident, which was determined to have happened at a home in New London, according to police.

Gil-Martinez is currently on administrative leave, but this sort of makes the point about police officers.

They should be the best among us, but the truth is that they’re not. Some of the best among us become law enforcement officers but that same profession is attractive to all kinds of people who probably shouldn’t wear a uniform of any kind beyond a prison jumpsuit.

Now, I’m not saying Gil-Martinez is guilty. That’s for a court to decide and if he is, he deserves to rot in a cell for a good long time. He’s really not the point here, though.

The point is that police officers aren’t a special class that’s above reproach. They’re people.

So why do so many gun control laws exempt them, particularly with regard to what they do while off the job?

I get that they may face certain threats because of their job that many others never will–they do make enemies, after all–but some of us make enemies just fine without a badge. I mean, I write political commentary. Do you think I haven’t been threatened? Sure. Does that mean political commentators should get an exemption as well?

The answer from your average anti-gunner would likely be that no, we shouldn’t.

So then why do the police? Don’t get me wrong, I have no issue with cops having guns. I have no problem with them having all the guns. I just don’t like the double standard.

Here’s a thought: If police need special privileges in order to protect themselves from their enemies, then why not just lift the restrictions so that police offers stop getting special treatment and others can then defend themselves?

Unfortunately, for anti-gunners, that’s not acceptable.

See, the issue isn’t guns. It’s just guns in the hands of people who aren’t drawing a government paycheck.

Trump’s pick for FCC chairman…..

Only 34% Say Country on Right Track; 56% Can’t Trust News

Only 34 percent of likely voters believe the United States is headed in the right direction, according to a new Rasmussen survey, and 56 percent say they don’t find the media delivers accurate news.

Rasmussen keeps weekly track of how voters feel regarding the direction of the country. This week’s report is up one point from last week, but it is up by three points from a year ago, when 31 percent of poll respondents thought the country was on the right track. Sixty-one percent of likely voters polled recently said the nation is headed in the wrong direction.

A separate survey revealed only 16 percent of respondents think it is easier to find news they can trust, and 25 percent think media accuracy is “about the same.”

But beyond those numbers, things get interesting socially and politically.

According to Rasmussen, 30 percent said Fox News “is the cable TV news channel they are most likely to trust.” Coming in second place at 23 percent is CNN, while MSNBC and Newsmax are tied at 15 percent.

“Among those who say they trust cable news for political news, most name either Fox News (38%) or CNN (29%) as the most trusted channel,” Rasmussen said.

Perhaps not surprisingly, among Democrats, 40 percent say CNN is their most trusted news source, followed by MSNBC at 26 percent and Vox News at 16 percent. On the flip side, 46 percent of Republicans prefer Fox News, followed by Newsmax at 26 percent and CNN at a pitiful 11 percent.

An impressive 68 percent of Democrats say their most trusted source for political news is either network television or major cable news channels, Rasmussen discovered. Among Republicans, network trust shrinks to 51 percent and among Independents, only 39 percent depend upon networks or cable news channels.

Among Independent voters, 45 percent trust independent online news sources for political news, along with 34 percent of Republicans and 22 percent of Democrats, according to Rasmussen.

Interestingly, more men (33%) than women (26%) say they trust Fox News most, while more women (17%) than men (12%) “prefer MSNBC.”

Credit Where Due: VP Harris Finally Pressed By Media on Illegally Obtained Firearms

It was quite surprising to hear it when it happened but Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee for president, was fact checked in real time about the real drivers of criminal gun violence. She was tripped up on her answer because the journalist pressing her wasn’t buying the vice president’s tired talking points.

It happened during an interview of the vice president at the National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) after one of the questioners asked Vice President Harris about her gun control platform.

For those needing any reminding, the Biden-Harris administration has been the most fervently anti-gun administration in history. Vice President Harris, as the administration’s “gun czar,” has infamously instituted a “whole-of-government” attack on the firearm and ammunition industry and the Second Amendment. She is colluding with gun control groups – who literally operate out of her office. As President Joe Biden’s “gun czar,” Harris has continually failed to bring criminals to account for their crimes.

Vice President Kamala Harris tries to claim to voters in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Georgia and other close-polling states that she “isn’t taking anyone’s guns away from them” while in the same breath calling for a ban and confiscation of an entire class of lawfully made and legally purchased firearms – the most popular rifle in America. That’s just about the extent of her “plan” to reduce criminal gun violence. But finally, she received pushback for specifics that voters deserve to hear.

Please Answer the Question

Whenever Vice President Kamala Harris has been asked about criminals committing gun crimes, her response is predictably always the same. She calls for more gun control on law-abiding Americans, lists a kitchen sink full of anti-Second Amendment talking points and blames Congress for inaction. This is despite the fact that for the first two years of the Biden-Harris administration, Democrats controlled both chambers in Congress and The White House. She never mentions that not even all Democrats in the U.S. Senate supported a bill to reinstate, and expanded, a so-called “assault weapons” ban. That doesn’t stop the vice president from repeating those calls. But the interviewers at the NABJ wanted more specifics from her.

“In cities like Philadelphia, handguns are responsible for most homicides and violent crime,” NPR’s Tonya Mosely began. “How will you address the issue of the use of handguns because a push for an assault weapons ban only addresses, um, a significant but small part of the problem?”

The vice president began her answer by repeating the talking point that she and her running mate Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz were both gun owners. She claimed “we’re not trying to take anyone’s guns away from them. But we do need an assault weapons ban.” As she continued to filibuster her answer about how Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) need to be banned and universal background checks must be implemented, Mosely interrupted and pressed her further.

“Respectfully, we do understand that. But I’m asking specifically about handguns because many of those handguns aren’t purchased at places that run background checks. In many of those instances those handguns aren’t bought lawfully.”

The vice president was stumped. She had no response to the logical reasoning that the firearm industry continues to highlight when calls for gun control are made – that criminals do not follow the law. NSSF has reported on Department of Justice data that shows 90 percent of firearms used by criminals in the commission of their crime were obtained through illicit means and not at a firearm retailer. It’s also one of the main reasons why universal background checks won’t work. That and the fact that a national firearm registry is prohibited by law under the Gun Control Act of 1986 and the Brady Act of 1993.

Continue reading “”

BLUF
If there’s one thing the Democrats have proven without a doubt over these last three and a half years, it’s that they’re committed cheerleaders to censorship and shutting down opposing views.

CA Gov. Newsom Signs Ban Against Political Deepfakes; Elon Musk Mercilessly Trolls Him With… Deepfakes

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a strict new censorship law Tuesday that will make it illegal to produce or distribute AI political videos around election season. Tell me that this doesn’t sound like it infringes on the First Amendment:

The new law, the strictest in the country, takes effect immediately and aims to crack down on deceptive content which uses artificial intelligence to create false images or videos.

The law makes it illegal to create and publish deepfakes ahead of Election Day and 60 days thereafter. It also allows courts to stop distribution of the materials and impose civil penalties, per The Associated Press.

The blowback was immediate. Former Republican State Senator Melissa Melendez (R) predicted this law will have a short shelf life:

A free speech group called The Fire argued that this is not the way to attack the problems posed by AI:

In targeting “deceptive” political content, California’s new law threatens satire, parody, and other First Amendment-protected speech.

A.B. 2839 bans sharing “deceptive” digitally modified content about candidates for office for any purpose. That means sharing such content even to criticize it or point out it’s fake could violate the law.

The law also requires satire and parody to be labeled, like requiring a comedian to preface every joke with an announcement he’s making a joke.

That’s not funny — it’s scary. Whatever concerns exist about AI-generated expression, violating the First Amendment isn’t the way to address them.

Newsom was triggered by a (hysterical) Kamala Harris campaign ad that Musk retweeted without telling everyone a fact that was completely obvious to any sentient being—it was a fake. I wrote about the “commercial” when it came out in July:

But Gavin grew cranky and failed to appreciate the humor. In fact, he said that the measure was in direct response to Musk’s post:

But what perhaps the elegantly coiffed governor failed to take into consideration was that Musk is kind of like a hornet’s nest: poke him, and he’ll come back at you like a swarm. He masterfully mocked the failed guv with several tweets, including one Tuesday where he retweeted the original fake Kamala ad (which currently has 55 million views) that so upset Gov. Grumpy:

He wasn’t done, though; remember that I said that it was like poking a hornet’s nest; you’ll probably get bitten more than once. On Wednesday, the X owner fired off another fake video, this one produced by the parody site The Babylon Bee. (Note to Mr. Newsom: the Bee openly says they are a parody site. I’m sure if they run afoul of this ridiculous new law, their lawyers will make that very clear.)

It is absolutely brutal—and brilliant:

I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, and I am not qualified to deliver a detailed legal analysis of the law. However, I can nevertheless confidently tell you that there will be plenty of court action surrounding it, and that it could ultimately be struck down.

The incredible power of AI is a serious issue, and sensible laws will have to be considered as it gets better and better. That being said, I’m sure not comfortable letting folks like Gavin Newsom decide what we can and cannot say. If there’s one thing the Democrats have proven without a doubt over these last three and a half years, it’s that they’re committed cheerleaders to censorship and shutting down opposing views.

More of the Nashville Trans Shooter’s Manifesto Just Dropped

The Tennessee Star has published 90 pages of the manifesto belonging to the “transgender” Nashville shooter who slaughtered six victims, including three children, at a private Christian elementary school on March 27, 2023.

According to the never-before-seen excerpts legally obtained by the local newspaper, Covenant School killer Audrey “Aiden” Hale, a 28-year-old biological woman who identified as a “transgender man,” wrote about wanting “a boy body in heaven” and craving “brown love.”

“If God won’t give me a boy body in heaven, then Jesus is a f*gg*t,” Hale wrote on one page.

On another, she said, “Brown love is the most beautiful kind.”

Hale had repeatedly questioned, “why does my brain not work right?” Concluding, “Cause I was born wrong,” she lamented, “Nothing on earth can save me…never ending pain. Religion won’t save.”

In an undated entry, Hale wrote, “The [cocoon] of my old self will die when I leave my body behind and the boy in me will be free; in the butterfly transformation; the real me.”

Hale often signed off with an octagonal symbol, which first appears on the journal’s cover. The shape was drawn on the very first page, opposite where Hale wrote, “Why does my brain not work right? Cause I was born wrong!!!”

The journal, which was written between January and March of 2023, is one of many Hale had in her possession.

Police initially identified this journal, along with a spiral notebook found in the car she used to drive to the school, as the shooter’s “manifesto.” Authorities also seized approximately 20 additional journals Hale authored over a 15-year period from 2007 to 2022. Those writings are said to span about 1,000 pages.

According to the local outlet, a source familiar with the Metro Nashville Police Department (MNPD) investigation handed over the handwritten journal, which The Tennessee Star is referring to as “The Covenant Killer’s 2023 Journal” in order to distinguish it from the numerous ones predating 2023, in early June of this year.

“We believe it to be authentic,” The Tennessee Star’s editor-in-chief Michael Patrick Leahy wrote in a statement on the outlet’s website. MNPD further confirmed its authenticity in court, with a court filing submitted by MNPD Lieutenant Alfredo Alevado authenticating it.

“We have had a First Amendment right to publish these unredacted documents from the moment we legally obtained them,” Leahy stated.

Leahy then outlined in great detail the legal avenues The Tennessre Star meticulously took to acquire the manifesto:

Continue reading “”

Matt Whitlock

Cotton lays out all the important facts that have been completely misrepresented:

“[Trump] didn’t take campaign photos there. These families — Gold Star families — whose children died due to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’s incompetence, invited him to the cemetery, and they asked him to take those photos…”

“You know who those families also invited? Joe Biden and Kamala Harris — where were they? Joe Biden was sitting at a beach. Kamala Harris was sitting at her mansion in Washington, DC. She was four miles away — ten minutes. She could’ve gone to the cemetery and honor the sacrifice of those young men and women, but she hasn’t. She never has spoken to them or taken a meeting with them. *It is because of her and Joe Biden’s incompetence that those 13 Americans were killed in Afghanistan.*”

And when the anchor pushes back that Harris attended that “they attended the dignified transfer,” Kamala Harris did NOT, just Joe who was seen and photographed repeatedly checking his watch.